Recommended Posts

Thanks for the C+C, it really fixed the design! It's hard to replace the fantastic gothic S-o-x, but a change of location makes such an adjustment possible. I'll probably replace the gothic S-o-x for both the Seattle and Tampa relocations, skewing modern with both locations.

The Sox being my team, I experiment with the designs quite a lot. A lot of times I'll test something out and wind up throwing it away because the elements won't come together and mesh with the history of the team. It's hard to break free from history and experience of the team and the culture surrounding it. So this was quite refreshing.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You know, I think I actually prefer that plain white version of the Sox home set. With the addition of a third color to their identity, the lack of pinstripes allows the red and yellow to breathe a bit better.

While I'm not a huge fan of that first Brewers prototype, I love the second one! The third isn't too shabby, either. I'm amazed at how many excellent A's and Brewers designs we've gotten this series.

53 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Thanks for the C+C, it really fixed the design! It's hard to replace the fantastic gothic S-o-x, but a change of location makes such an adjustment possible. I'll probably replace the gothic S-o-x for both the Seattle and Tampa relocations, skewing modern with both locations.

For the Seattle Sox, I'd go with some version of their '76-81 logo. Heck, with Chicago and Seattle both having seven letters, you could swap out the former for the latter in the logo and it would be a seamless transition. I'm most curious to see what colors you choose for them.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Sox being my team, I experiment with the designs quite a lot. A lot of times I'll test something out and wind up throwing it away because the elements won't come together and mesh with the history of the team. It's hard to break free from history and experience of the team and the culture surrounding it. So this was quite refreshing.

Thanks! With a team that has such a rich and varied visual history as the White Sox, it's always fun to experiment with them.

On 9/20/2018 at 12:33 PM, coco1997 said:

You know, I think I actually prefer that plain white version of the Sox home set. With the addition of a third color to their identity, the lack of pinstripes allows the red and yellow to breathe a bit better.

While I'm not a huge fan of that first Brewers prototype, I love the second one! The third isn't too shabby, either. I'm amazed at how many excellent A's and Brewers designs we've gotten this series.

For the Seattle Sox, I'd go with some version of their '76-81 logo. Heck, with Chicago and Seattle both having seven letters, you could swap out the former for the latter in the logo and it would be a seamless transition. I'm most curious to see what colors you choose for them.

Thank you! I'm starting to like the non-pinstriped one a bit more, as it jives more with the 1917 inspiration. I'll update the post to reflect that later.

The Brewers prototype bit made me a little disappointed that the team didn't use the second design or adapt the first design to the Pilots' color scheme. While the radical arc Tuscan lettering is a bit derrivative of the Red Sox/Mets and the scripts are fairly standard, the blue/yellow would have made them a tad more unique. All I can say is that I'm glad that I won't be revisiting blue/yellow and Milwaukee for a long time.

The '76-'81 Sox logo will be the base for the "initial" (read:throwback) design, as it fits with the similar aesthetic of the Supersonics from the period. I'm tempted to use royal & kelly for the initial design, with the team adopting a more sedate navy & green-heavy teal color scheme once the 1990s roll around or the team moves into the neo-retro Safeco Field.

On 9/20/2018 at 10:51 PM, BellaSpurs said:

Set 2 is the best!! Although that logo could be personally the worst in Sox history, you made it work well with the Germanic theming

Thanks.

On 9/20/2018 at 12:50 PM, Dalcowboyfan92 said:

I like the merger (Option #4), but really wonder how the merger set would look using the pinstripes?

Just curious is all.

Ask, and you shall receive!

It's like the 1990-93 uniform, about 20 years before that set's inception.

On 9/20/2018 at 11:08 PM, vtgco said:

Really interesting (and unexpected) take for the Milwaukee White Sox! The German flag motif is a cool idea.

Thank you for the (primarily) white socks. That said, I'd prefer the pattern be a bit smaller, but also appear on the sock-in-diamond logo.

I especially like the black Milwaukee alt. That wordmark is great.

The blue feels out of place but looks great, and was more in line with my expectations.

Meanwhile, I like both your Tuscan and merged/idealized Brewers sets. The Navy+red is kinda bland IMO and I'm not a big fan of the Pilots-style set. The last powder blue jersey looks great!

Thank you! I can see where you're coming from with smaller sock stripes, but I like that the thick stripes add a nice colorful punch to the design. It helps the flag-style imagery come across in the concept.

I'm glad you liked the merged set. The Brewers had all the ingredients to get their look right the first time (either with Tuscan or scripts), but circumstances made it so that it didn't happen. Heck, the BiG would fit in well with both designs.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The story of the expansion Washington Senators is one of pain and frustration. Urinatingtree covered it a bit in his Texas Rangers video (in his typical style), but I'll try to get into a bit more detail as to why they left. Basically:

1. The team never had a solid foundation in ownership. The first two ownership groups suffered severe financial losses, while Bob Short consistently planned to move the team out of DC for a variety of reasons (e.g., going into debt, raising ticket prices, and fighting with the Armory Board over his stadium lease, etc.). Setting a $12.4 million price tag for selling the team didn't help matters.1

2. On-field failures compounded the team's financial woes, with only one winning season in their 11 campaigns. Short's meddling with the infamous Denny McLain trade also did not help the team build upon their brief bout of success. @pmoehrin sums up that year wonderfully in this post, referring to Ted Williams' time as manager:

On 7/26/2018 at 1:02 PM, pmoehrin said:

That was [Ted Williams'] first year managing the club, and everyone got excited because it was the first competitive team Washington had fielded in over two decades. A HOF rookie manager as the catalyst for that success was a straightforward narrative to tell, and that's what got written.

The reality was it was a mediocre team that just happened to have half a dozen guys who had career-best seasons. Those types of teams never last more than a season or two, and that's what happened there.

In fairness, I don't think any manager could have done much with the Senators. They didn't have the firepower to keep up with teams like Baltimore, Detroit, Minnesota, and Oakland who were the dominant AL teams at the time, but having Ted Williams as a manager didn't do them any favors.

TL;DR: This .gif, with the Sens as Lapis/Android 17 and ownership/finances/poor play as the Hellzone Grenade energy.2

But what if Short sold the team to local investors and the team turned it around eventually? What would they look like?

Thanks to a few discoveries from William Henderson, we now know that the team may have deleted navy from their already red-heavy uniforms at the onset of the double-knit era.3 This red-centric trend would continue for a bit, with the team reintroducing navy in small doses throughout the 1980s and '90s. The "Senators" script and "Curly W" insignia would receive several tweaks over the years, with a "Washington" script appearing in the late-'90s/early-'00s. By the time the team moved to the Navy Yard Stadium, they'd be wearing a slightly more ornate version of that "one winning season" design, much like the NL Washington Nationals of today.

The logos have not received much modification from my Senators MK I concept. I've flipped the color balance to be red-heavy, while replacing Albertus with Futura (I prefer Futura to the Nats' Neutraface). The 2011 update of the "curly W" is the secondary, while the George Washington crest design (from my alternate take of the 1901 Sens) shows the "W" with the DC city flag and the 1961 founding date.

The uniforms borrow a bit from the Nationals and Rangers. The striping pattern is a slightly more balanced version of the asymmetrical stripes used by the Rangers and Nats (1970s-style when on white/grey backgrounds), while the scripts are modified versions of the Nats' cursive wordmarks. I placed the primary logo on the sleeves. The number font is a slight update of the Sens/Rangers' early-1970s font.4

The Friday alternates feature an alternate navy cap with a red "Curly W" outlined in white. This was my little homage to the 1963-67 design and the 1961-67 color balance. I went with "Senators" at home and "Washington" on the road, as the "Curly W" looks terrible on a jersey. The tertiary is now the sleeve patch, for some variety.

The dugout jacket is a palette swap of my Sens/Nats jacket, albeit with a different striping/pocket pattern and the "Washington" cursive script.

The Second Senators had the basis of a decent look towards the end of their run (only red-heavy team in the AL East), which proved to mesh well with the modernizations provided by the modern Nats. Heck, this could work well as a concept for what would have happened had Bud Selig gotten his way and named the team the Senators (before DC city officials rightfully told him that the name didn't work because the District of Columbia has no senatorial representation). C+C is appreciated, as always!

For the alternate take, what if the Sens underwent a bit of a 1990s makeover?

Thanks, guys! It does have a bit of a "HEALTH" vibe to it, which I like.

I'm a bit hesitant to make it the primary, as it doesn't spell out the team name.

On 9/24/2018 at 10:15 AM, Paul Lucas said:

The Senators have never looked better, great work!!! Swap “Senators” with “Nationals” and you’ve got an instant classic!

Thank you. The swap works well, with both this concept and my Project 32 Nationals.

On 9/24/2018 at 2:02 PM, PowderedWater said:

Oh boy! This means the last team (up for speculation) is closer. Only one other team and maybe some relocations left.

Well, the 1980s and '90s are full of attempted relocations, with flirtations involving Toronto, St. Petersburg, and DC.

On 9/24/2018 at 2:05 PM, Jimmy Lethal said:

You really like your Dragon Ball references, huh? Make an Eva reference you coward

That I do! Episode 60 of Team Four Star's abridged series just came out, so I'm on a bit of a fix right now. I'm not all that into Eva, but I know the gist of it. Consider Eva part of the .gif list now!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The what-if scenario here has the Sens MK II surviving into the 1990s, facing a similar identity crossroads as the Texas Rangers. In order to boost fading merchandise sales and draw interest to a developing window of contention, the team underoges a significant redesign. This overhaul would see them promote an oft-neglected color in their set (navy for the Senators, like red for the Rangers), while embracing metallic colors and emphasizing a new font. In a bit of synchronicity with the NL Nationals, the font is a modified version of Albertus. The redesign was a huge hit at first, but interest eventually fades by the early-00s and the team overhauls their look again (either to my previous concept or a 2005-09 Nats-like design).

The uniforms are standard fare for the mid-90s/early-00s, with thick placket striping and simple arm/pants trim. The wordmarks use a similar layout to the Diamondbacks and Devil Rays, placed on a slant. They also feature a gold inline, mimicking the style of the Rockies while adding a metallic flair to the look. Sleeves feature the primary logo as the patch. The numbers are a modified version of Albertus (condensed and with squared-off tops for the "A," akin to Albertus Nova Black), while the names are Block Extra Condensed on nameplates (akin to the Rangers' early-00s uniforms).

The alternates are pretty standard for the time, with a sleeveless version of the home uniform and a navy jersey for both home and road use. This jersey emphasizes the "W," with the justification of that design's precedence with the MK I Senators/AL Nationals. It features a "DC" cap, first with a gold bill and then with a navy one. I figured that the metallic bill would fall out of favor around 2000 or 2001 (like it did for the Astros and Mariners).

The jacket takes cues from the 1990s Rangers, with contrast-colored sleeves. However, the contrast emerges in the form of a gradient from gold to navy.

The Sens' 1990s overhaul would be a perfect blend of what the Rangers and NL Nationals produced in the '90s-early '00s, emphasizing former accent colors and increasing metallic colors' presence in the identity. While I doubt the look would have stuck around to this day, it's still a fun simulation. C+C is appreciated, as always!

The what-if scenario here has the Sens MK II surviving into the 1990s, facing a similar identity crossroads as the Texas Rangers. In order to boost fading merchandise sales and draw interest to a developing window of contention, the team underoges a significant redesign. This overhaul would see them promote an oft-neglected color in their set (navy for the Senators, like red for the Rangers), while embracing metallic colors and emphasizing a new font. In a bit of synchronicity with the NL Nationals, the font is a modified version of Albertus. The redesign was a huge hit at first, but interest eventually fades by the early-00s and the team overhauls their look again (either to my previous concept or a 2005-09 Nats-like design).

The uniforms are standard fare for the mid-90s/early-00s, with thick placket striping and simple arm/pants trim. The wordmarks use a similar layout to the Diamondbacks and Devil Rays, placed on a slant. They also feature a gold inline, mimicking the style of the Rockies while adding a metallic flair to the look. Sleeves feature the primary logo as the patch. The numbers are a modified version of Albertus (condensed and with squared-off tops for the "A," akin to Albertus Nova Black), while the names are Block Extra Condensed on nameplates (akin to the Rangers' early-00s uniforms).

The alternates are pretty standard for the time, with a sleeveless version of the home uniform and a navy jersey for both home and road use. This jersey emphasizes the "W," with the justification of that design's precedence with the MK I Senators/AL Nationals. It features a "DC" cap, first with a gold bill and then with a navy one. I figured that the metallic bill would fall out of favor around 2000 or 2001 (like it did for the Astros and Mariners).

The jacket takes cues from the 1990s Rangers, with contrast-colored sleeves. However, the contrast emerges in the form of a gradient from gold to navy.

The Sens' 1990s overhaul would be a perfect blend of what the Rangers and NL Nationals produced in the '90s-early '00s, emphasizing former accent colors and increasing metallic colors' presence in the identity. While I doubt the look would have stuck around to this day, it's still a fun simulation. C+C is appreciated, as always!

Up next, Washington nearly gets a replacement in the 1970s.

This Sens set just oozes 90s. Especially the two-toned gradiant dugout jackets.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Rangers-inspired primary is interesting. I always like alternate-universe stuff where the same ideas of today are arrived at in different ways. Took me a while to get used to the scripts and how gold seems like the primary color by being the interior one, but is outnumbered by red and blue, as well as gold being a primary color at all, but I came to understand it as experimental '90s design. I wonder whether they would have added an extraneous black drop shadow.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Thanks! I had a feeling you'd like it. Here's a plain white version, which looks fairly similar to a White Sox prototype that surfaced on our unused logos/uniforms thread.

While I prefer pinstripes, the plain white looks pretty good as well.

Thanks for the C+C, it really fixed the design! It's hard to replace the fantastic gothic S-o-x, but a change of location makes such an adjustment possible. I'll probably replace the gothic S-o-x for both the Seattle and Tampa relocations, skewing modern with both locations.

Thank you. I wanted something to mix up the team's visual identity and adding yellow/red worked pretty well.

Anyway, it's time to prototype!

MILWAUKEE BREWERS - A Tale of Three (Four) Prototypes

Since I’m saving the Seattle Pilots for last in the series, consider this their chronological entry. We all know that Selig moved the Pilots to Milwaukee after purchasing them, with many of us having a familiarity with their first uniforms.

These outfits merely stripped the lettering off of the Pilots’ jerseys, with the home uniform receiving a reduction in trim striping after a year (link to 1971 home jersey). However, the team did consider several prototypes before settling on this look. @Gothamite goes into greater detail on his website, borchertfield.com, but the gist of it is that the team created at least three designs.

I’ve combined bits of all three designs into my ideal 1970 Brewers design.

We could argue that these designs demonstrate how the newly-relocated Pilots could have had some solid looks. Yes, they’re derivative, but they would have been excellent placeholders for the now-iconic (and I don’t throw that word around lightly, unlike some) Ball-in-Glove.